My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
05-10-2021 Council Packet
Orono
>
City Council
>
2021
>
05-10-2021 Council Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
11/8/2021 4:48:47 PM
Creation date
11/8/2021 4:38:10 PM
Metadata
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
302
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
AGENDA ITEM <br />Prepared By: mcc Reviewed By: J. Barnhart Approved By: <br /> <br />members of the public attended the public hearing. Some of their concerns are summarized <br />below. Council should reference the draft Planning Commission minutes (Exhibit E) and the <br />video from the public hearing to review the public comments in their entirety. <br /> <br />Identified Concerns during the Hearing: <br />• Lot of Record/Buildability: Prior to 2011, the City considered lots which were <br />significantly substandard in area/width to be unbuildable. A property owner could apply <br />for a variance but our standards for approval were different and more stringent than they <br />are currently as guided by the State Statue. In or around 2011, the State updated the <br />statutes regarding nonconforming properties as far as buildability was concerned, <br />particularly in the Shoreland. The Statute revisions outlined minimum guidelines for <br />determining buildability and when/if a variance would be required from local zoning <br />standards. Following the Statute updates the City’s code was updated to be in line with <br />the revised allowances and standards. <br />• Tree removal: A number of the public comments referenced tree removals in the right-of- <br />way. The applicants have not proposed removal of any trees within the walking path from <br />the proposed dock location to their lot. If trees become a concern, the applicants <br />understand that the City requires permits and approvals for any tree removals within the <br />75-foot setback and within the City’s right-of-way. <br />• Wetland: Comments were made that the intended dock location is a Key Conservation <br />area, as determined by the MCWD. The MCWD mapping indicates that a majority of <br />Big Island is classified as a Key Conservation Area. Pending confirmation from the <br />MCWD, Staff notes that there do not seem to be specific regulations regarding the Key <br />Conservation Areas. <br />• Island Access for Construction/Contractors: The applicants chosen location is not what is <br />considered the common/primary access for deliveries of materials, septic and well <br />drilling contractors, etc., that location is the improved right-of-way situated between 450 <br />and 460 Big Island. A dock in this location would block this historical access. <br />• Permit 2038 revocation: The wording in Resolution 2038 is clear. “Should there be any <br />other requests from inland property owners to use this site for the installation of a dock to <br />their properties, this permit is automatically revoked…” although not the applicants’ <br />intent, their request to install a dock on this location triggers this revocation. The <br />applicants’ amended request to install a dock and share the use of the dock with the <br />owners of 230 Big Island appears to provide a solution, though when pressed by the <br />Commission, the owner of 230 Big Island does not wish to share. <br />• Winter Dock Storage: Most property owners store their private docks on their lakeshore <br />properties. In keeping with the spirit of this practice, the applicants have proposed a <br />storage location on this right-of-way, on the south side of the corridor, out of the way of <br />any winter access needs. <br />• Other inland properties: There are only two additional interior lots on this portion of the <br />island (490 and 500 Big Island) without lake access who may, in the future, request a <br />permit for a dock on right-of-way. The other remaining inland properties on the east side <br />are in common ownership with a lakeshore property, thus providing the opportunity for a <br />dock. <br /> <br />7. Staff Recommendation. Staff recommends approval of a dock to be shared by the applicants <br />and the owners of 230 Big Island, with the following conditions: <br /> <br />a) The location of the installed dock shall be approved by the LMCD, and shall be approved <br />by the City Administrator.
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.